COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton 

ECONO CLEAN JANITORIAL SERVICE 

AND 

TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0874-97-1 PER CURIAM 

 AUGUST 12, 1997 

FLORA EMERSON 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Jennifer G. Marwitz; Law Offices of Richard 

A. Hobson, on brief), for appellants. 

 (W. Mark Broadwell, on brief), for appellee. 

 Econo Clean Janitorial Service and its insurer (hereinafter 

collectively referred to as "employer") appeal a decision of the 

Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) awarding benefits 

to Flora Emerson (claimant). Employer contends that the 

commission erred in finding that claimant proved she sustained an 

injury by accident arising out of her employment on July 5, 1996. 

 Finding no error, we affirm the commission's decision. 

 On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable 

to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. 

Mullins, 10 Va. App. 211, 212, 390 S.E.2d 788, 788 (1990). "To 

prove the 'arising out of' element, [in a case involving injuries 

sustained from falling down stairs at work,] [claimant] must show 

that a condition of the workplace either caused or contributed to 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
 2 

her fall." Southside Virginia Training Ctr. v. Shell, 20 Va. 

App. 199, 202, 455 S.E.2d 761, 763 (1995) (citing County of 

Chesterfield v. Johnson, 237 Va. 180, 184, 376 S.E.2d 73, 76 

(1989)). "Whether an injury arises out of the employment is a 

mixed question of law and fact and is reviewable by the appellate 

court." Plumb Rite Plumbing Serv. v. Barbour, 8 Va. App. 482, 

483, 382 S.E.2d 305, 305 (1989). 

 In ruling that claimant's injuries arose out of her 

employment, the commission found as follows: 

 The claimant was descending an outdoor 

concrete stairwell at night carrying cleaning 

supplies. We find credible the claimant's 

testimony that she could not stop her fall 

because she could not hang onto the railing 

due to the fact that she was carrying 

cleaning bottles, towels, and a broom and 

dustpan. We find that the claimant has 

adequately explained any discrepancies 

between her testimony and her recorded 

statement. Although she neglected to mention 

the broom and dustpan in her recorded 

statement, the claimant is certain she had 

them because she was going to sweep the weigh 

station. With regard to the railing, the 

claimant explained that she tried to hold 

onto the railing when she slipped, but 

because of the items she was carrying she 

could not stop her fall. The claimant heard 

her knee pop and felt pain when she landed on 

it. 

 Claimant's testimony constitutes credible evidence to 

support the commission's factual findings. Based upon these 

findings, the commission could conclude that 

 [i]t is reasonable to infer that if she had 

not been carrying the cleaning supplies the 

claimant could have prevented the injury, and 

we so find because the claimant has credibly 

testified to this effect. . . . The carrying 
 3 

of the spray bottles, paper towels, broom, 

and dustpan prevented the claimant from 

stopping her fall, resulting in the knee 

injury. 

 "Where reasonable inferences may be drawn from the evidence 

in support of the commission's factual findings, they will not be 

disturbed by this Court on appeal." Hawks v. Henrico County Sch. 

Bd., 7 Va. App. 398, 404, 374 S.E.2d 695, 698 (1988). Here, the 

evidence supported an inference that conditions of the workplace, 

i.e., the carrying of the various cleaning supplies, either 

caused or contributed to claimant's injury. 

 Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision. 

 Affirmed.